TN Repub state Senator wants to tie welfare benefits to kids' academic performance

[Serious]

but most people know that a large amount of welfare recipients aren't taking the time to prepare their child properly for school and one day END the cycle of ignorance and poverty. If these parents are threatened with the possibility of loosing their benefits, i'll guarantee you that the grades of alot of these kids would dramatically improve.

I for one applaud out of the box thinking seen in ideas like this one.

Basically this.

It should be seen as an incentive, for the targeted people to do better. IMO, the gpa requirement should be at least at: 2.0 - 2.5. But cats in here are seriously fighting tooth and nail over defending a D- average.

Can any of the posters here, who received an influx D's and F's, over their academic tenure, please inform the-coli, how hard you worked towards those passing those courses.

After further review, stripping funds away from children does seem counterproductive, but I'd be all open ears, for a solution that rewards, students on government assistance, for keeping a somewhat respectable gpa 2.3+...

 

[feelosofer]

I disagree with the premise of this law, it's not that well thought out but part of me thinks that there needs to be some SHAME brought back into welfare. I was on food stamps as a child and when I was a kid, you knew who was and who wasn't and it aspired to not be like that, or at least take a job when I was 15 and get my fam off it. Honestly though if the law passes then welfare recipients are either gonna have to put more effort into schooling out get off it. This is what happens when you take government money, they have to right to place demands on such money.

 

[Spanish Thought]

I think people are forgetting just how bad some of these parents are at parenting. I've seen a lot of bad parents, and if you threaten their money based on their kid's performance in school, you're not gonna get them to study with their child, but more like a threat to beat their ass if they fail. Now you just kept the failure rate the same while increasing the workload of social services....

 

[Brown_Pride]

Basically this.

It should be seen as an incentive, for the targeted people to do better. IMO, the gpa requirement should be at least at: 2.0 - 2.5. But cats in here are seriously fighting tooth and nail over defending a D- average.

Can any of the posters here, who received an influx D's and F's, over their academic tenure, please inform the-coli, how hard you worked towards those passing those courses.

After further review, stripping funds away from children does seem counterproductive, but I'd be all open ears, for a solution that rewards, students on government assistance, for keeping a somewhat respectable gpa 2.3+...

the problem is that for those NOT getting 2.3 you'd get that argument that they are being penalized, you'd hear all the same arguments you're hearing now.

"why are we not giving funds to everyone equally and penalizing the kids for the parents mistakes"

I bet if this guy suggested reducing all foodstamps by 30% and allowing a 40% increase depending on your child's grades dudes in here would still be up in arms talking about "Wez can't getz no Deees"

 

[Spanish Thought]

how about keeping things the same, not penalizing them at all, and only rewarding them if they do better? have the same standard amount they get now, and give them a little more if they get good grades, that is a better way of solving the "they need to do better" incentive without harming anybody